Law enforcement personnel commonly cite weight and size as negative factors that influence their decision to carry a baton on their duty belt. As reported in “Johnson, J. (1996). Police impact weapons: An expanding future. Gazette: A Royal Canadian Police Publication, 58(1), 12-15”, while 10% of officers reported carrying the heavy wooden baton or truncheon at all times, 95% of officers surveyed reported that they carried a lighter and collapsible baton at all times.”
Unfortunately the benefits of having a light, easily carried weapon had its downside. A study conducted by Roberts, Nokes, Leadbeatter and Pike (1994) compared the standard wooden truncheon that was being used in the United Kingdom with the baton that was being used in the United States and other European countries. The study found that the traditional truncheon's impact area was nearly double (196%) that of the expandable baton. The data set showed a greater tendency toward extended areas of bruising with the traditional truncheon or baton upon impact, while the impact area of the expandable baton was smaller and thus produced less bruising.
Various examples of batons are shown in the following United States Patent Office publications: U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,110,375 and 5,356,139, both by Parsons, U.S. Pat. No. 5,839,967 by Moe, and U.S. Pat. No.2008/0316737 by Summers. None of the prior art devices are able to realize the advantages noted above of both a heavy, wooden baton/truncheon and a lighter, collapsible baton.